Re: [ga] Questions for Joe Baptista / Eric Dierker, and why the GA list should be ended

[Karl Auerbach <karl@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

sotiris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:

> One of the oft-repeated arguments against the idea of an Individual
> Registrant's Constituency has always been the 'issue' of identification
> and verification of legitimate individuals... how many times did we hear
> that argument in the past as a reason for not even considering an IRC. 
> Yet, on the basis of SEVEN unverified votes...
You touch on a question that I've always wondered about:

For all of ICANN's "stakeholder" bodies, not one person is required to 
show that they actually are a "stakeholder".
For example, a person who claims stakeholder role as a registry is never 
required to produce a written delegation from the officers of the 
registry attesting that that person is, in fact, a properly accredited 
representative of that registry.
Yet individuals have been rejected, ejected, neglected, and made 
dejected because ICANN requires each and every one to produce a 
credential, else there can be no election and no representation.
Seems that in the land of ICANN what is good for the industrial goose is 
not good enough for the individual gander.
(As for Eric D. - I am expressing no opinion.)

                --karl--